Inflammatory statements

In the past two days, I've read two news stories that focused on a one-two punch of inflammatory issues: medicine and kids. The first was written about the FDA probing a possible link between the asthma drug Singulair and suicide risk; the second reported data on how drug errors hurt 1 in 15 hospitalized kids. Wow. Shocking, right? After reading these headlines, you'd take your 4 year old off his asthma maintenance program and be nervous about the care your child might receive when hospitalized.

I don't want to minimize risk, and certainly everyone should be vigilant when it comes to the health and care of their children, and themselves for that matter.

But what irritated me about both of these articles was the content that you eventually got to within them. Regarding Singulair, Merck and the FDA are working together to analyze data based on anecdotal evidence that has been received. No clear connection, just an investigation that could frankly go either way at this point. Merck released a statement:

In a cumulative analysis recently provided to the FDA of Merck's randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials -- which included over 11,000 adults and children in over 40 studies who were treated with Singulair -- there were no reports of suicidal thoughts or actions and no completed suicides in the patients who received Singulair," the statement read. "Additionally, in a cumulative analysis recently provided to the FDA of Merck's randomized, double-blind, clinical trials that compared Singulair with other active agents to treat asthma [which included over 3,900 adults and children who were treated with Singulair and over 3,400 who were treated with other asthma therapies], there was one patient who attempted suicide who received Singulair, and there were three patients who attempted suicide who received other asthma therapies [including inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists].

If this is true, there's no sight of a smoking gun.

As for the drug errors data, while it does seem that subjective reporting has resulted in underreporting of incidences, the article says (way down towards the end of the article):

While 22 percent of the problems were considered preventable, most were relatively mild. None were fatal or caused permanent damage, but some “did have the potential to cause some significant harm,” said Sharek, who is medical director of quality at Stanford University's Lucile Packard Children's Hospital.While 22 percent of the problems were considered preventable, most were relatively mild. None were fatal or caused permanent damage, but some “did have the potential to cause some significant harm,” said Sharek, who is medical director of quality at Stanford University's Lucile Packard Children's Hospital.

I realize that people make inflammatory statements to get peoples' attention, often feeding off initial reactions of anger or fear to elicit a response. I know that headlines are developed to hook in readers, sell newspapers or get higher traffic and ratings. But I wrote my Master's thesis in media literacy, so I have a bit of experience weeding through the hype.

If you'd like help in figuring out what to look for to help you weed through medical news articles, read this.

Happy (and more analytical) reading!